Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper investigates the representational geometry of harmful and benign refusal in aligned LLMs to understand the phenomenon of over-refusal. It finds that harmful refusals are captured by a single global direction, while over-refusals are task-dependent and reside within benign task-representation clusters. Linear probing confirms representational distinctions between the two refusal types from early transformer layers.
Over-refusal isn't just a misapplication of a global "no" switch; it's deeply intertwined with how LLMs represent and execute specific tasks.
Aligned language models that are trained to refuse harmful requests also exhibit over-refusal: they decline safe instructions that seemingly resemble harmful instructions. A natural approach is to ablate the global refusal direction, steering the hidden-state vectors away or towards the harmful-refusal examples, but this corrects over-refusal only incidentally while disrupting the broader refusal mechanism. In this work, we analyse the representational geometry of both refusal types to understand why this happens. We show that harmful-refusal directions are task-agnostic and can be captured by a single global vector, whereas over-refusal directions are task-dependent: they reside within the benign task-representation clusters, vary across tasks, and span a higher-dimensional subspace. Linear probing confirms that the two refusal types are representationally distinct from the early transformer layers. These findings provide a mechanistic explanation of why global direction ablation alone cannot address over-refusal, and establish that task-specific geometric interventions are necessary.
